NEWS

Recoil comp for 2 weapon firing Options

  • 42 Replies
  • 12416 Views

mtfeeney = Baron

  • *
  • Ace Runner
  • ****
  • Posts: 1389
  • I love crunchy numbers
« Reply #15 on: <05-05-13/2026:34> »
So, in summary, you're saying he can't do what he's trying to do, for starters.  You can't fire a SS gun twice in an action phase, so the best you can do is fire each gun as a separate simple action.  And since guns are fired simultaneously, the math would follow the previous example.
Remember, you don't have to kill the vehicle to stop it, just kill the guy driving it.

Michael Chandra

  • *
  • Catalyst Demo Team
  • Prime Runner
  • ***
  • Posts: 9920
  • Question-slicing ninja
« Reply #16 on: <05-05-13/2028:22> »
Well you can dual-fire 2 Warhawks at the same time. It is, however, a big waste unless you really needed that second Simple Action for something else. And only their uncompensated recoil would double up. As singleshots they don't have recoil, so they don't share uncompensated recoil to begin with if I'm right on "recoil is per weapon".
How am I not part of the forum?? O_O I am both active and angry!

ZeConster

  • *
  • Prime Runner
  • *****
  • Posts: 2557
« Reply #17 on: <05-06-13/0343:33> »
I think you may be on to something, but I don't agree with your example.  It definitely says uncompensated recoil from one gun is applied to the other.  In your example, the first gun fires a short burst.  This normally causes -2 recoil, but you have 2 RC.  That's 0 recoil passed to the second gun.  It fires, racking up -2 recoil, but it compensates for this.  Then the first gun fires again, this time going up to -5 recoil.  The 2 RC drops it to -3, and this is uncompensated recoil.  The second gun fires, earning -5 for itself PLUS -3 uncompensated from the other gun.  So that's -8 reduced by 2 RC to -6 total.  The 4 shots are at -0/-0/-3/-6.
Since you're firing both at the same time, it doesn't make sense for there to be a "second" gun with more recoil. When they say "any uncompensated recoil modifiers applicable to one weapon also apply to the other weapon", this doesn't mean you pick one gun whose uncompensated recoil modifiers apply to the other gun - it happens both ways. So what actually happens is this:
  • First Burst:
    • "Left" gun: -2 Recoil, 2 RC, no penalty.
    • "Right" gun: -2 Recoil, 2 RC, no penalty.
    • "Left" gun: 0 uncompensated Recoil + 0 uncompensated Recoil from "Right" gun, gives a -0 Recoil penalty.
    • "Right" gun: 0 uncompensated Recoil + 0 uncompensated Recoil from "Left" gun, gives a -0 Recoil penalty.
  • Second Burst:
    • "Left" gun: -5 Recoil, 2 RC, 3 uncompensated Recoil.
    • "Right" gun: -5 Recoil, 2 RC, 3 uncompensated Recoil.
    • "Left" gun: 3 uncompensated Recoil + 3 uncompensated Recoil from "Right" gun, gives a -6 Recoil penalty.
    • "Right" gun: 3 uncompensated Recoil + 3 uncompensated Recoil from "Left" gun, gives a -6 Recoil penalty.
Note that even if the "Left" gun were to have an RC of 6, both guns would still have the -3 penalty from the "Right" gun's uncompensated Recoil - the spare RC of the "Left" gun doesn't affect the uncompensated Recoil from the "Right" gun.

Now, in the case of firing 2 SS weapons at the same time, what you'd get is this:
  • "Left" gun: no Recoil, no penalty.
  • "Right" gun: no Recoil, no penalty.
  • "Left" gun: 0 uncompensated Recoil + 0 uncompensated Recoil from "Right" gun, gives a -0 Recoil penalty.
  • "Right" gun: 0 uncompensated Recoil + 0 uncompensated Recoil from "Left" gun, gives a -0 Recoil penalty.
« Last Edit: <05-06-13/0345:25> by ZeConster »

mtfeeney = Baron

  • *
  • Ace Runner
  • ****
  • Posts: 1389
  • I love crunchy numbers
« Reply #18 on: <05-06-13/0418:34> »
That's what Michael said earlier, minus the error with Single Shot.  They can only be fired once per action phase.  You could fire 2 SS at once as a simple action, but that'd be a waste since you can't fire them as a second simple action.  Better to fire each once, not splitting your pool.  The essence of my mistake was that I don't believe in firing 2 guns at once, but that's just an interpretation error on my part.
Remember, you don't have to kill the vehicle to stop it, just kill the guy driving it.

Michael Chandra

  • *
  • Catalyst Demo Team
  • Prime Runner
  • ***
  • Posts: 9920
  • Question-slicing ninja
« Reply #19 on: <05-06-13/0528:15> »
Yeah, it's a real shame to fire 2 Warhawks in the same Simple Action. Sure, no recoil, but you don't get recoil firing one, then the other, either.

Jyster, any questions?
How am I not part of the forum?? O_O I am both active and angry!

Thrass

  • *
  • Omae
  • ***
  • Posts: 841
« Reply #20 on: <05-06-13/0555:55> »
You can always get shiva arms and fire 2 warhawks 2 times in one IP ;P
Speech - Thought - Matrix
Characters: Andy - Andys rolls

UmaroVI

  • *
  • Prime Runner
  • *****
  • Posts: 2655

Jyster

  • *
  • Newb
  • *
  • Posts: 10
« Reply #22 on: <05-06-13/1452:24> »
Well, I was hoping to get an official response instead of people who might know of the rule.

I understand that you can fire each warhawk in a different  simple action, but that's not the rule I'm asking about.

Plus, getting recoil comp on the weapons doesn't answer the question also.

So how do I get an official answer? Because thats what I need to give to the group for the answer.

Michael Chandra

  • *
  • Catalyst Demo Team
  • Prime Runner
  • ***
  • Posts: 9920
  • Question-slicing ninja
« Reply #23 on: <05-06-13/1503:54> »
An official answer isn't obtainable. All you can do is quote the same part I quoted, which indicates Recoil is per weapon. A lot of the rules are like that: It's not literally legally spelled out but it's still fairly doable to get a good interpretation of the language used.

If you want to quote the exact rules, you got this:
SR4a p152: Weapons that fire more than one round in an Action Phase suffer from an escalating recoil modifier as the rounds leave the weapon.

That's the entire definition of recoil. Guns that fire multiple rounds per IP get recoil from their own bullets. Unless a rule specifically mentions something else, that's the way it goes. And dual-wielding says that uncompensated recoil is shared. Nothing said about compensated recoil (if any).
How am I not part of the forum?? O_O I am both active and angry!

viaRailGun

  • *
  • Chummer
  • **
  • Posts: 157
  • yipee ki yay...
« Reply #24 on: <05-06-13/1506:13> »
the answer can be found on p. 150 SR4A under "attacker using a second firearm", as quoted by JoeNapalm earlier on this thread. simultaneously firing two warhawks will net you +0R. neither gun is generating recoil, therefore there is no recoil applicable.

edit: this explains firing two weapons in the same simple action.
« Last Edit: <05-06-13/1511:17> by viaRailGun »
Onward all you crystal soldiers.
Touch tomorrow, energize.

Jyster

  • *
  • Newb
  • *
  • Posts: 10
« Reply #25 on: <05-06-13/1609:02> »
Like I said, there is no consensus on this rule so far.

So why can't we get an official ruling in the shadowrun catalyst rules forum?

viaRailGun

  • *
  • Chummer
  • **
  • Posts: 157
  • yipee ki yay...
« Reply #26 on: <05-06-13/1625:37> »
Like I said, there is no consensus on this rule so far.

So why can't we get an official ruling in the shadowrun catalyst rules forum?

i think this is because there was some confusion in the matter regarding wether you meant 1 simple action=2 shots, or 2 simple actions=1 shot each. ambiguous indeed.
Onward all you crystal soldiers.
Touch tomorrow, energize.

Michael Chandra

  • *
  • Catalyst Demo Team
  • Prime Runner
  • ***
  • Posts: 9920
  • Question-slicing ninja
« Reply #27 on: <05-06-13/1638:04> »
Their reasons I can't tell you, since I have no contact with their staff whatsoever. However, I should note that there's several controversies surrounding rules that they never gave an official statement on, and those are the big debates. In this case, however, we do appear to have reached consensus by pulling out the exact rule-statements. Note that Baron said that "the essence of my mistake was that I don't believe in firing 2 guns at once, but that's just an interpretation error on my part."

Also, keep in mind people can often misinterpret things. In the recent weeks, I've seen someone argue that Full Body Armor protects against magic when the rules state it doesn't, I've seen someone argue that Long Bursts do not use cumulative recoil but just their own recoil, I've seen a statement that "free" means no nuyen cost AND no essence cost. If on each of these occasions, even when the wording in the books seems very clear, they have to come out and clarify because people refuse to go with the most reasonable interpretation of what's written, then they wouldn't have any time left for development of SR5. If they came out every time there was a disagreement on RAW and RAI, it'd cost a LOT of time.
How am I not part of the forum?? O_O I am both active and angry!

mtfeeney = Baron

  • *
  • Ace Runner
  • ****
  • Posts: 1389
  • I love crunchy numbers
« Reply #28 on: <05-06-13/1927:23> »
He's asking for an answer from Catalyst.  The answer is that they don't post here.  The closest you'll get is a freelancer sometimes.
Remember, you don't have to kill the vehicle to stop it, just kill the guy driving it.

emsquared

  • *
  • Ace Runner
  • ****
  • Posts: 1029
  • Super Perfundo
« Reply #29 on: <05-06-13/2147:40> »
So why can't we get an official ruling in the shadowrun catalyst rules forum?
Because we don't need one. And this goes for just about all rules arguments. You have the language - the RAW, if you will. Take it as it is literally written (a SS action creates no recoil - which would mean ever), and if there is conflicting language (which there is not here) choose what is best for your table (in this case the alternate is - consider it as a second shot on the same weapon for some unknown and incomprehensible reason, and is only good for a table that has a GM with a thing against DW). It's not hard. There's no a mystery. You may think for yourself.